Hooray for Michigan Governor on Occupational Licensure

Gov. Snyder recently sent a letter to Michigan House Speaker Kevin Cotter and Senate Majority Leader Arlan Meekhof explaining some of the problems of occupational licensure.

The governor summarizes some of the good work the Legislature has done, and outlines the principles he'll use in "determining whether to support any legislation providing for additional occupation regulation.” Below are these principles:

There must be a substantial harm or danger to the public health, safety, or welfare as a result of unregulated practice, which will be abated through licensure. The practice of the occupation must require highly specialized education or training. The cost to state government of regulating the occupation must be revenue neutral. There must be no alternatives to state regulation of the occupation (such as national or third-party accreditation) which adequately protect the public. The scope of practice must be clearly distinguishable from other licensed, certified, and registered occupations. Regulation through registration or listing (as opposed to licensure) does little to protect public health and welfare, and is not an appropriate use of government resources. Occupational licensure laws require people to pay a fee and complete state-approved training before they are legally allowed to practice a trade. The public benefits of these laws are dubious, and when they are proposed, the Legislature almost never requires evidence of how licensing laws will actually protect public health and safety. Usually, these mandates are initiated and supported by special interest groups who benefit directly when their competition is limited.

Gov. Snyder recognizes that licensing serves to protect groups from competition, which drives up prices for consumers and harms the poor the most. He should be applauded for his efforts and the Legislature should move forward with eliminating these barriers to, as Gov. Snyder put it, the "pursuit of happiness."

Government should only issue licenses for a *very* limited subset of activities, because make no mistake, licenses are uniquely about control, only very secondarily about safety.

However, this being said, the *private* issue of licenses needs to be regulated by government, to prevent many of the abuses associated with it.

1) Limiting competition to drive up prices.
2) Using licenses to establish guilds only open to insiders.
3) Demanding organizational fees or dues in exchange for a licensed “right to work”. (Think unions).
4) Lack of quality control of the work of the licensed.
5) Interstate problems.

I am certain that the majority of ‘licensing’ and certifications required are strictly about control. A true pay $$$$$ to play schemes, and keeping out competition and ‘undesirables’ (of those ‘in charge’). Really just two things - Money and Control.

Having a license doesn’t stop or slow accidents. I work in a hospital - trust me. No, I wouldn’t want a ‘doctor’ that wasn’t licensed to operate on me. Heck, I don’t want the ones that ARE licensed to operate on me either!!!

But to require a license or certification for things we didn’t need them for in previous generations is a way to keep people down.

If someone in networking wanted to work in database because hey, they were really good at it. Guess what - new certification needed. If someone who was good at medical records and had years of experience coding medical records wanted to code records now because it paid more - get a new certification! If you are certified to work on databases and PCs but have also worked in networking for years and a job came up - get a new certification.

The person that cuts my hair only needs to be good. The person who works on car only needs to be good at what they do. That should be MY CHOICE who I want to pay for a service.

Now don’t talk to me like a liberal and say that means I don’t believe in NO licensing. But I have to say, very, very little should be done. And if I think hard about it, I would lean far more towards no licensing with mandated ‘full disclosure’ rather than the Statist Control Nazis.
I mean, it is NOT LIKE THEY TAKE AWAY MEDICAL OR LAW LICENSES hardly now to those who have wronged others. It is ALL about money and control - period.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.